Arctic News: hydroxyl

Showing posts with label hydroxyl. Show all posts

Saturday, October 11, 2025

Methane Danger

Global methane concentrations have not risen as strongly during El Niño years 2023 and 2024 as they did from 2020 to 2022, as illustrated by the above image, showing monthly methane concentrations through May 2025, and the image below, showing annual methane growth through 2024. The question is, why did the growth in methane concentrations slow down in 2023 and 2024?

Is the rise in methane releases partly masked?

One possible mechanism, described here earlier, is that, as temperatures increase and water vapor in the atmosphere increases accordingly (7% more water vapor for every 1°C warming), more hydroxyl in the atmosphere, more methane gets broken down by the increased hydroxyl in the atmosphere. Accordingly, the stronger methane breakdown by more hydroxyl in 2023 and 2024 may give the impression that methane releases appeared to slow down, whereas methane releases may actually have kept growing and because this growth was getting masked, it was overlooked.

In other words, methane releases may have continue to grow at accelerating pace, but since an increasingly large part of the methane releases was decomposed by more hydroxyl, the growth in methane concentrations in the atmosphere only appeared to slow down because methane releases were partly masked by growth in hydroxyl, as discussed in earlier posts such as this 2017 one.

Where could the extra methane releases have come from? In part, they may have come from seafloor methane releases. In a 2014 post, methane releases were estimated at 771 Tg/y, whereas the IPCC's estimate was 678 Tg/y. That post estimated methane from hydrates and permafrost at 13% of total methane emissions, whereas the IPCC's estimate was a mere 1% of total methane emissions.

According to this mechanism, methane releases actually started to increase more strongly (partly due to more methane erupting from the seafloor of oceans) from the early 2000s, but hydroxyl also kept increasing, slowing down growth in methane concentrations. Eventually, increasing methane releases (including seafloor methane releases) progressively overwhelmed the growth in hydroxyl, contributing to a stronger rise in overall methane concentrations in the atmosphere.

The growth in methane concentrations peaked in 2022, but after that, the emerging El Niño in 2023 and 2024 drove up temperatures and thus also hydroxyl. So, while growth in methane releases may appear to have slowed down over the past few years, this mechanism suggests that some methane releases may be overlooked, particularly methane releases for the seafloor of oceans, due to increased hydroxyl production in line with more water vapor in the atmosphere over the past few years.

Earthquake danger

Further illustrating the danger of seafloor methane releases, the combination image below shows an earthquake that occurred on October 10, 2025, in between South Africa and Antarctica (left). Methane at 1000 mb (near surface) shows up in a magenta-colored area in between South Africa and Antarctica, indicating methane releases of 1980 ppb and higher (right).

Note that the high methane concentrations near Antarctica are not in the same spot where the earthquake occurred. This can be attributed to the wind moving air clockwise around Antarctica. The combination image below shows wind at 10 m (left) and at 250 mb or hPa (right) on October 11, 2025.

To watch the wind at 1000 hPa or mb (near surface) move around and over Antarctica on October 12, 2025, click on this nullschool.net link.

Danger of increase snowfall over Antarctica

The combination image below shows a distorted Jet Stream (250 hPa) moving over Antarctica, which results in high preciptable water anomalies over that area (left) and snowfall (right).

The danger of increased snowfall over Antarctica is described in the image below.

[ screenshot from earlier post ]

The methane danger has been described in many earlier posts, e.g. the image below is from a 2014 post. The image shows a polynomial trend based on IPCC AR5 data from 1955 to 2011, pointing at methane reaching mean global levels higher than 3000 ppb by the year 2030. If methane starts to erupt in large quantities from clathrates underneath the seafloor of oceans and from thawing permafrost, then something like this may well happen and the amount of methane in the atmosphere could double by 2030.

Climate Emergency Declaration

UN secretary-general António Guterres recently spoke about the need for “a credible global response plan to get us on track” regarding the international goal of limiting the global temperature rise. “The science demands action, the law commands it,” Guterres said, in reference to a recent international court of justice ruling. “The economics compel it and people are calling for it.”

What could be added is that the situation is dire and unacceptably dangerous, and the precautionary principle necessitates rapid, comprehensive and effective action to reduce the damage and to improve the outlook, where needed in combination with a Climate Emergency Declaration, as described in posts such as this 2022 post and this one and as discussed in the Climate Plan group.

Links

• Focus on Antarctica
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2025/09/focus-on-antarctica.html

• Record low Arctic sea ice volume minimum highlights methane danger
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2025/10/record-low-arctic-sea-ice-volume-highlights-methane-danger.html

• Global methane concentration and annual growth
https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends_ch4
also discussed on Facebook at:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/arcticnews/posts/10163340957609679

• Transforming Society
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2022/10/transforming-society.html

• Climate Plan
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/climateplan.html

• Climate Emergency Declaration
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/climate-emergency-declaration.html

Friday, November 24, 2017

Warming is accelerating

Warming is accelerating. For some time, it has been warmer than the 1.5°C guardrail that the Paris Agreement promised should not be crossed. This conclusion follows from above analysis of NASA land+ocean data 1880-October 2017, adjusted by 0.59°C to cater for the rise from preindustrial and with a trend added that also indicates that the global temperature look set to cross the 2°C guardrail soon, with 2021 falling within the margins of the trend line.

[ click on images to enlarge ]

The trend line shows a strong and ominous direction upward. Nonetheless, the situation could be even more dire than this trend indicates, since some warming elements are not fully incorporated in these data.

As an example, the NASA data look at the temperature at the surface of the oceans, which has increased strongly, as also illustrated by the image on the right.

Much warming has also occurred below the sea surface, while there has been some cooling of the sea surface. Moreover, ocean heat has also increased strongly over the years, as the image below illustrates, and looks set to increase further.

After all, what happens to oceans is important, as 93.4% of global warming currently goes into oceans.

The fact that much warming is taking place below the sea surface could make that it gets overlooked. If much of this warming were to get transferred from the Arctic Ocean to the atmosphere over the next few years, then the temperature rise over the next few years could take an even sharper turn upward.

The threat that warming below the sea surface is overlooked is highlighted by the image below, which shows huge warming of Arctic waters at selected locations near Svalbard.

Above image focuses on temperatures at selected locations near Svalbard (see map below). In 1981-2011, temperatures were gradually falling by more than one degree Celsius over the period of measurement, i.e. from October 1 to November 23 (blue line), a fall that is in line with the change in seasons. Over this period in 2017, temperatures were 13.19°C or 23.77°F higher than in 1981-2011, while the temperature didn't seem to be falling (red line).

How could these waters get a stunning 13.19°C warmer than two decades ago?

Global warming did hit the North Atlantic hard, particularly along the track of the Gulf Stream all the way to the Arctic Ocean. This has translated into stronger winds along the track of the Gulf Stream, which are making that ever larger amounts of warm water are getting pushed from the North Atlantic to the Arctic Ocean.

A temperature rise underneath the sea surface can be overlooked when merely monitoring the average surface temperature of the Arctic Ocean, especially when stronger winds have caused more evaporation, cooling down the water at the surface.

[ 100% relative humidity (left) as jet stream moves over Arctic Ocean (right) ]

Stronger winds, higher temperatures and the presence of more open water in the Arctic have all contributed to stronger rainfall in the Arctic. It looks like the rain did cause a freshwater lid to form at the surface of the Arctic Ocean, acting as an insulator and preventing transfer of ocean heat to the atmosphere. This also contributed to a colder atmosphere over the Arctic Ocean, i.e. colder than it would otherwise have been. At the same time, since less heat could escape from the Arctic Ocean to the atmosphere, this freshwater lid has resulted in warmer water, as is evident from the huge anomalies at the locations near Svalbard. The forecast below that Arctic will be 7.2°C or 12.96°F warmer than in 1979-2000 on December 3, 2017, illustrates just how warm the Arctic Ocean currently is.

This freshwater lid has also made it easier for sea ice to form at the surface, as ice will form in freshwater as warm as just below 0°C (or 32°F), compared to salty seawater that must cool down to -2°C (or 28.4°F) before freezing. The seawater underneath the sea ice is warm enough to melt the ice from below, but the layer of freshwater at the surface acts as an insulator.

There would have been less sea ice, had it not been for the rain resulting in this freshwater lid. Much of the freshwater lid did turn into sea ice in September 2017, as air temperatures came down below 0°Cs, and this sea ice similarly acted as an insulator, preventing transfer of heat from the Arctic Ocean to the atmosphere. Importantly, while much of the additional freshwater at the surface did turn into sea ice in 2017, this is only a temporary phenomenon, as no ice will form once the surface of the water will stay above 0°C, which looks imminent as temperatures keep rising.

[ Cyclone carrying particulates into the Arctic Ocean ]

Further sea ice loss means that less sunlight will get reflected back into space and will instead get absorbed by the Arctic, further accelerating warming in the arctic.

Additionally, more heat is radiated from sea ice into space than from open water (feedback #23).

Stronger cyclones can also bring more particulates into the Arctic Ocean, speeding up the demise of sea ice by darkening it when settling on ice, as illustrated by the image on the right.

In conclusion, while the formation of the freshwater lid at the surface of the Arctic Ocean has been holding back the collapse of the sea ice, the delay of the collapse can only be a temporary one as temperatures keep rising. The Arctic Ocean is warming at accelerating speed and collapse of the sea ice looks imminent.

[ click on image to enlarge ]

Above images confirm the loss of the thicker sea ice over the past few years, while zero Arctic sea ice is within the margins of the trend line of the image on the right.

Less sea ice will on the one hand make that more heat can escape from the Arctic Ocean to the atmosphere, but on the other hand the albedo loss and the additional water vapor will at the same time cause the Arctic Ocean to absorb more heat, with the likely net effect being greater warming of the Arctic Ocean.

Another point to consider is latent heat, as discussed in earlier posts. The danger is illustrated by the image below, showing that heat threatens to destabilize methane hydrates at the seafloor of the Arctic Ocean. As the temperature of the Arctic Ocean keeps rising, more heat threatens to reach sediments that have until now remained frozen. Melting of the ice in these sediments then threatens to unleash huge eruptions of seafloor methane that has until now been kept locked up by the permafrost.

The Buffer has gone, feedback #14 on the Feedbacks page

Additionally, melting of permafrost on land can cause rapid decomposition of soils, resulting in releases of huge amounts of greenhouse gases, further accelerating warming in the Arctic, which in turn will result in more greenhouse gases (CO2, CH4, N2O, water vapor) entering the Arctic atmosphere, more albedo changes, etc., in a vicious self-reinforcing cycle of runaway warming.

Levels of CO2, CH4 an N2O have been rising rapidly since 1750, as above image shows. Methane levels have risen 257% since 1750.

Did the rise in methane emissions slow down from 1999 to 2006?

One explanation for the apparent slowdown is that, as temperatures kept rising, water vapor in the atmosphere increased accordingly (7% more water vapor for every 1°C warming), resulting in more hydroxyl that broke down more methane in the atmosphere since 1990. So, while the rise in methane levels appeared to slow down, methane emissions were actually continuing to increase, but as an increasingly large part of methane was decomposed by hydroxyl, this rise in methane was overlooked. In 2007, Arctic sea ice reached a record low, triggering more methane eruptions from the seafloor of the Arctic Ocean. While hydroxyl kept increasing, seafloor methane kept increasing faster, making that methane emissions increasingly started to overwhelm hydroxyl, resulting in a stronger rise in overall methane levels. In 2013, I estimated methane emissions at 771 Tg/y, whereas the IPCC's estimate was 678 Tg/y. The post estimated methane from hydrates and permafrost at 13% of total methane emissions, whereas the IPCC's estimate was a mere 1% of total methane emissions. - Sam Carana, Dec. 2017.

[ click on images to enlarge ]

The presence of methane is felt particularly strongly over the Arctic Ocean. Above images show high methane levels over the Arctic Ocean on December 2, 2017, when methane reached a peak level of 2771 ppb and on December 13 and 14, 2017, when peak levels as high as 2713 ppb were reached.

Methane levels have been rising strongly since 2000 and this rise looks set to continue, as illustrated by the image on the right.

There is also a danger that, as temperatures keep rising, the course of the ocean current near Svalbard could change, making that more heat will reach the East Siberian Arctic Shelf (ESAS), thus further warming up sediments there, resulting in huge amounts of methane erupting from the seafloor.

Add up the impact of all warming elements and, as an earlier analysis shows, the rise in mean global temperatures from preindustrial could be more than 10°C in a matter of years, as illustrated by the images below.

A 2°C rise in temperature alone is devastating, especially when considering that temperature peaks in history look to have been less high than previously thought, as concluded by a recent study in ocean paleotemperature. Therefore, a 10°C rise may well result in the warmest temperatures experienced on Earth. Moreover, the speed at which this rise could occur leaves little or no time for plants and animals to adapt, in contrast to historical climate swings that typically took many years to eventuate.

Friday, December 4, 2015

Ocean Heat Depth

Ocean heat at the equator

On November 24, 2015, equatorial waters at ≈100 m (328 ft) depth at 110-135°W were over 6°C (10.8°F) warmer than average in 1981-2000, as illustrated by above image. The animation below shows equatorial ocean heat over the past few months, illustrating that temperature anomalies greater than 6°C (10.8°F) occurred throughout this period at depths greater than 100 m (328 ft).

The danger of ocean heat destablizing clathrates in the Arctic

The danger is that ever warmer water will reach the seafloor of the Arctic Ocean and destabilize methane that is held there in sediments the form of free gas and hydrates.

So, how comparable is the situation at the equator with the situation in the Arctic? How much heating of the Arctic Ocean has taken place over the past few years?

The image on the right, produced with NOAA data, shows mean coastal sea surface temperatures of over 10°C (50°F) in some areas in the Arctic on August 22, 2007.

In shallow waters, heat can more easily reach the bottom of the sea. In 2007, strong polynya activity caused more summertime open water in the Laptev Sea, in turn causing more vertical mixing of the water column during storms in late 2007, according to this study, and bottom water temperatures on the mid-shelf increased by more than 3°C (5.4°F) compared to the long-term mean.

This study finds that drastic sea ice shrinkage causes increase in storm activities and deepening of the wind-wave-mixing layer down to depth ~50 m (164 ft) that enhance methane release from the water column to the atmosphere. Indeed, the danger is that heat will warm up sediments under the sea, containing methane in hydrates and as free gas, causing large amounts of this methane to escape rather abruptly into the atmosphere.

The image below, replotted by Leonid Yurganov from a study by Chepurin et al, shows sea water temperature at different depths in the Barents Sea, as described in an earlier post.

The image below is from a study published in Nature on November 24, 2013, showing water temperatures measurements taken in the Laptev Sea from 1999-2012.

Water temperatures in Laptev Sea. Red triangles: summer. Blue triangles: winter. Green squares: historic data.
From Shakhova et al., (2013) doi:10.1038/ngeo2007

Before drawing conclusions, let's examine some peculiarities of the Arctic Ocean more closely, specifically some special conditions in the Arctic that could lead to greater warming than elsewhere and feedbacks that could accelerate warming even more.

Amount of methane ready for release

Sediments underneath the Arctic Ocean hold vast amounts of methane. Just one part of the Arctic Ocean alone, the East Siberian Arctic Shelf (ESAS, rectangle on map below, from the methane page), holds up to 1700 Gt of methane. A sudden release of just 3% of this amount could add over 50 Gt of methane to the atmosphere, and experts consider such an amount to be ready for release at any time (see above image).

Total methane burden in the atmosphere now is 5 Gt. The 3 Gt that has been added since the 1750s accounts for almost half of the (net) total global warming caused by people. The amount of carbon stored in hydrates globally was in 1992 estimated to be 10,000 Gt (USGS), while a more recent estimate gives a figure of 63,400 Gt (Klauda & Sandler, 2005). The ESAS alone holds up to 1700 Gt of methane in the form of methane hydrates and free gas contained in sediments, of which 50 Gt is ready for abrupt release at any time.

Imagine what kind of devastation an extra 50 Gt of methane could cause. Imagine the warming that will take place if the methane in the atmosphere was suddenly multiplied by 11.

Whiteman et al. recently calculated that such an event would cause $60 trillion in damage. By comparison, the size of the world economy in 2012 was about $70 trillion.

Shallow waters in the Arctic Ocean

Shallow waters and little hydroxyl

The danger is particularly high in the shallow seas that are so prominent in the Arctic Ocean, as illustrated by the light blue areas on the image on the right, from an earlier post.

Much of the waters in the Arctic Ocean are less than 50 m deep. Being shallow makes waters prone to warm up quickly during summer temperature peaks, allowing heat to penetrate the seabed.

This can destabilize hydrates and methane rising through shallow waters will then also enter the atmosphere more quickly, as it rises abruptly and in plumes.

Elsewhere in the world, releases from hydrates underneath the seafloor will largely be oxidized by methanotroph bacteria in the water and where methane does enter the atmosphere, it will quickly be oxidized by hydroxyl. In shallow waters, however, methane released from the seabed will quickly pass through the water column.

Large abrupt releases will also quickly deplete the oxygen in the water, making it harder for bacteria to break down the methane.

Very little hydroxyl is present in the atmosphere over the poles, as illustrated by the image on the right, showing global hydroxyl levels, from an earlier post.

In case of a large abrupt methane release from the Arctic Ocean, the little hydroxyl that is present in the atmosphere over the Arctic will therefore be quickly depleted, and the methane will hang around for much longer locally than elsewhere on Earth.

Shallow waters make the Arctic Ocean more prone to methane releases, while low hydroxyl levels make that methane that enters the atmosphere in the Arctic will contribute significantly to local warming and threaten to trigger further methane releases.

High levels of insolation in summer in the Arctic

Furthermore, the amount of solar radiation received by the Arctic at the June Solstice is higher than anywhere else on Earth, as illustrated by the image below, showing insolation on the Northern Hemisphere by month and latitude, in Watt per square meter, from an earlier post.

Warm water enters Arctic Ocean from Atlantic and Pacific Oceans

What further makes the situation in the Arctic particularly dangerous is that waters are not merely warmed up from the top down by sunlight that is especially strong over the Arctic Ocean in summer on the Northern Hemisphere, but also by warm water that flows into the Arctic Ocean from rivers and by warm water that enters the Arctic Ocean through the Bering Strait and through the North Atlantic Ocean. The latter danger is illustrated by the image below, from an earlier post.

Feedbacks

Furthermore, there are feedbacks that can rapidly accelerate warming in the Arctic, such as albedo losses due to loss of sea ice and snow cover on land, and changes to the jet stream resulting in more extreme weather. These feedbacks, described in more details at this page, are depicted in the image below.

Methane

Above image shows that methane levels on December 3, 2015, were as high as 2445 parts per billion (ppb) at 469 millibars, which corresponds to an altitude of 19,810 feet or 6,041 m.

The solid magenta-colored areas (levels over 1950 ppb) that show up over a large part of the Arctic Ocean indicate very strong methane releases.

Note there are many grey areas on above image. These are areas where no measurements could be taken, which is likely due to the strength of winds, rain, clouds and the jet stream, as also illustrated by the more recent (December 5, 2015) images on the right.

The polar jet stream on the Northern Hemisphere shows great strength, with speeds as high as 243 mph or 391 km/h (over a location over japan marked by green circle) on December 5, 2015.

So, high methane levels may well have been present in these grey areas, but didn't show up due to the weather conditions of the moment.

Furthermore, the white geometric areas are due the way the satellite takes measurements, resulting in areas that are not covered.

Finally, it should be noted that much of the methane will have been broken down in the water, before entering the atmosphere, so what shows up in the atmosphere over the Arctic is only part of the total amount of methane that is released from the seafloor.

In conclusion, the high methane levels showing up over the Arctic indicate strong methane releases from the seafloor due to warm waters destabilizing sediments that contain huge amounts of methane in the form of free gas and hydrates.

Climate Plan

As global warming continues, the risk increases that greater ocean heat will reach the Arctic Ocean and will cause methane to be released in large quantities from the Arctic Ocean seafloor. The 2015 El Niño has shown that a huge amounts of ocean heat can accumulate at a depth greater than 100 m (328 ft). Conditions in the Arctic and feedbacks make that methane threatens to be released there abruptly and in large quantities as warming continues.

The situation is dire and calls for comprehensive and effective action as described at the Climate Plan.

On November 24, 2015, equatorial waters at ≈100 m (328 ft) depth at 110-135°W were over 6°C (10.8°F) warmer than average...
Posted by Sam Carana on Friday, December 4, 2015

Monday, October 19, 2015

Lucy-Alamo Projects - Hydroxyl Generation and Atmospheric Methane Destruction

As you know the weather is starting to change rapidly for the worse now and I have been working on Arctic methane induced global warming for about 14 years. There are massive deposits of methane gas trapped in the undersea permafrosts in Russian waters and onland in Siberia as well and if the global warming boils of just 10% of what is there, there is enough to cause a Permian style extinction event that humanity will not survive. Some brilliant work on the Arctic methane threat has been done by a Russian scientist Natalia Shakhova and others who indicate that we are in a very perilous position, if we don't find a way of reducing the atmospheric methane and depressurizing the undersea methane to stop the massive methane eruptions there. I and some other workers have designed a radio-laser Atmospheric methane destruction system based on the early Russian radio-wave induced conversion of methane to nano-diamonds. This radio-laser system can be installed on nuclear powered boats such as the 40 Russian Arctic ice breakers and start immediate work on destroying the atmospheric methane clouds that are building up in the Arctic. An abstract about the system is attached and it has been accepted for presentation at a congress of the American Meteorological Society to be held on January 10 - 14, 2016 at New Orleans in Louisiana, U.S.A. This system should be mounted on the nuclear icebreakers and used onshore. Once the methane is brought under control there should be a reduction in the massive fire hazards, heat waves and severe storms systems that are plaguing Russia and the rest of the world.

Yours sincerely,

Malcolm P.R. Light
Earth Scientist

The Abstract follows:-
No. 275345 Lucy - Alamo Projects - Hydroxyl Generation and Atmospheric Methane Destruction.
by
Malcolm P.R. Light (Dr)
Retired, Cortegana, Spain

Congress of the American Meteorological Society, Wednesday 13, January, 2016

Methane formed by organisms in the water becomes trapped in the fabric of water ice crystals when it freezes and is stable below about 300 metres depth in the Arctic Ocean and on the shallow East Siberian Arctic Shelf. There are such massive methane reserves below the Arctic Ocean floor, that they represent 100 times the amount, that is required to cause a Permian style major extinction event, should the subsea Arctic methane be released into the atmosphere because of methane's giant global warming potential (100 to 1000 times CO2) over a short time period (Light and Solana, 2012 - 2014, Carana 2012 - 2014). There are also giant reservoirs of mantle methane, originally sealed in by shallow methane hydrate plugs in fractures cutting the Arctic seafloor and onshore in N. Siberia (Light, 2014, Carana 2013, Light, Hensel and Carana, 2015). The whole northern hemisphere is now covered by a thickening atmospheric methane global warming veil from Arctic methane emissions at the level of the jet streams, which is spreading southwards at about 1 km a day and already totally envelopes the United States (Figure 1). There must therefore be a world-wide effort to capture and thus depressurise the methane in the subsea and surface Arctic permafrost and eradicate the quantities accumulating in the ocean and atmosphere.

Methane produced at the surface diffuses upward and is broken down by photo dissociation (sunlight) and chemical attack by nascent oxygen and hydroxyl (Heicklen, 1967). The Lucy Project is a radio/laser system for destroying the first hydrogen bond in atmospheric methane when it forms dangerously thick global warming clouds over the Arctic (Figure 2, Light & Carana, 2012). It generates similar gas products to those normally produced by the natural destruction of methane in the atmosphere over some 15 to 20 years. Radio frequencies are used in generating nano-diamonds from methane gas in commercial applications over the entire pressure range of the atmosphere up to 50 km altitude (Figure 2, Light and Carana, 2012). Recent experiments have shown that when a test tube of seawater was illuminated by a polarized 13.56 MHZ radio beam, that flammable gases (nascent hydrogen and hydroxyls) were released at the top of the tube (iopscience.iop.org, 2013). In the Arctic Ocean, polarized 13.56 MHZ radio waves will decompose atmospheric humidity, mist, fog, ocean spray and the surface of the waves themselves into nascent hydrogen and hydroxyl over the region where a massive methane torch (plume) is entering the atmosphere, so that the additional hydroxyl produced will react with the rising methane, breaking a large part of it down (Figure 2)(iopscience.iop.org, 2013).

A better system could use Nd: glass heating lasers containing hexagonal neodymium which is stable below 863oC (Krupke 1986 in Lide and Frederickse, 1995). Neodymium glass lasers have extreme output parameters with peak powers near 10 to the power 14 watts when collimated and peak power densities of 10 to the power 18 watts per square cm if focused (Krupke 1986 in Lide and Frederickse, 1995). Velard (2006) states that at the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, for inertial confinement nuclear fusion, "192 beams of Nd: glass - plate amplifier chains are being used in parallel clusters to generate very high energy (10 kilojoules) at a very high power (>10 power 12 watts) and at the second and third harmonics of the fundamental, with flexible pulse shapes and with sophisticated spectral and spacial on - target laser light qualities". The Nd: glass laser system is more stable and efficient than the longer wavelength CO lasers and shorter wavelength KrF lasers (Velard, 2006).

The three 13.56 MHZ radio transmitters in the Lucy Project (Figure 2) could be replaced by 3 groups of parallel lasers each forming a giant circular flash lamp. Half the Nd: glass lasers in the flash lamp could be tuned to exactly 21 million times the 13.56 MHZ methane destruction/nano-diamond formation frequency (Mitura, 1976). The adjacent alternate lasers will be tuned to a slightly different frequency exactly out of phase with the primary frequency by 13.56 MHZ.The Nd: glass lasers have a wavelength of 1052 nm equivalent to a frequency of 2.85*10 power 8 MHZ. The methane molecule requires 435 kilo-joules per mole to dislodge the first hydrogen proton and an average of 409.3 kilo - joules per mole for the other three protons (Hutchinson, 2014). Hydroxyl requires 493 kilo - joules per mole to generate it from water (Hutchinson, 2014). A set of four focused Nd; glass lasers will have an energy of about 454.5 kilo-joules per mole, and will be strong enough to dislodge the first hydrogen proton from a methane molecule. Of course this can also be achieved by increasing the number of focused lasers to six or eight. Exactly the same neodymium laser system could be shone on the sea surface, at the base of the rising methane cloud, generating hydroxyls and nascent oxygen and thus breaking down the methane. The power source for these radio transmitters/lasers in the Arctic can come from floating or coastal nuclear or gas electric power stations and the transmitters could be located on shore or on boats, submarines, oil-rigs and aircraft. We have only 1 to 5 years to get an efficient methane destruction radio-laser system designed, tested and installed (Lucy and Alamo (HAARP) projects) before the accelerating methane eruptions take us into uncontrollable runaway global warming. Humanity will then be looking at catastrophic storm systems, a fast rate of sea level rise and coastal zone flooding with its disastrous effects on world populations and global stability.

Links

- Lucy-Alamo Projects - Hydroxyl Generation and Atmospheric Methane Destruction, by Malcolm P.R. Light (Dr) Light
https://ams.confex.com/ams/96Annual/webprogram/Paper275345.html

- North Siberian Arctic Permafrost Methane Eruption Vents, by Malcolm P.R. Light, Harold H. Hensel and Sam Carana

http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2015/04/north-siberian-arctic-permafrost-methane-eruption-vents.html

- WARNING - Planetary Omnicide between 2023 and 2031

http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2015/02/warning-planetary-omnicide-between-2023-and-2031.html
and

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10155073267455161&set=a.10150592349770161.675455.655795160&type=3

- Poster created for Geophysical Congress on methane hydrates, earthquakes and global warming, Nice, France, 2002, by Malcolm Light and Carmen Solana
http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/seismic-activity.html

Poster Presentation at American Meteorological Society's 18th Conference on Atmospheric Chemistry, January 10 - 14,...
Posted by Sam Carana on Monday, October 19, 2015

Friday, January 30, 2015

Why are methane levels over the Arctic Ocean high from October to March?

Water temperatures at different depth

Why are methane concentrations in the atmosphere over the Arctic Ocean so high from October through to March?

The image below, replotted by Leonid Yurganov from a study by Chepurin et al, shows sea water temperature at different depths in the Barents Sea.

Above image illustrates that, while Arctic sea water at the surface reaches its highest temperatures in the months from July to September, water at greater depth reaches its highest temperature in the months from October to March. Accordingly, huge amounts of methane are starting to get released from the Arctic Ocean's seafloor in October.

Surface temperatures in October

As the image below shows, temperature at 2 meters was below 0°C (32°F, i.e. the temperature at which water freezes) over most of the Arctic Ocean on October 26, 2014. The Arctic was over 6°F (3.34°C) warmer than average, and at places was up to 20°C (36°F) warmer than average.

Image from 'Ocean temperature rise'

At the same time, continents around the Arctic Ocean are frozen. Surface temperatures over the Arctic Ocean were higher than temperatures on land at the end of October, due to the enormous amounts of heat being transferred from the waters of the Arctic Ocean to the atmosphere. This was the result of ocean heat content, which in 2014 was the highest on record, especially in the Arctic Ocean, which also made that at that time of year the sea ice extent was still minimal in extent and especially in volume.

Start of freezing period

In October, the Arctic Ocean typically freezes over, so less heat will from then on be able to escape to the atmosphere. Sealed off from the atmosphere by sea ice, greater mixing of heat in the water will occur down to the seafloor of the Arctic Ocean.

Less fresh water added to Arctic Ocean

The sea ice also seals the water of the Arctic Ocean off from precipitation, so no more fresh water will be added to the Arctic Ocean due to rain falling or snow melting on the water. In October, temperatures on land around the Arctic Ocean will have fallen below freezing point, so less fresh water will flow from glaciers and rivers into the Arctic Ocean. At that time of year, melting of sea ice has also stopped, so fresh water from melting sea ice is no longer added to the Arctic Ocean either.

Rising salt content

As addition of fresh water ends, the salt content of the water in the Arctic Ocean starts to rise accordingly, while the Gulf Stream continues to push salty water into the Arctic Ocean. The higher salt content of the water makes it easier for ice to melt at the seafloor of the Arctic Ocean. Saltier water causes ice in cracks and passages in sediments at the seafloor of the Arctic Ocean to melt, allowing methane contained in the sediment to escape.

Pingos and conduits. Hovland et al. (2006)

The image on the right, from a study by Hovland et al., shows that hydrates can exist at the end of conduits in the sediment, formed when methane did escape from such hydrates in the past. Heat can travel down such conduits relatively fast, warming up the hydrates and destabilizing them in the process, which can result in huge abrupt releases of methane.

Heat can penetrate cracks and conduits in the seafloor, destabilizing methane held in hydrates and in the form of free gas in the sediments.

Less hydroxyl in atmosphere

Besides heat, open water also transfers more moisture to the air. The greater presence of sea ice from October onward acts as a seal, making that less moisture will evaporate from the water. Less moisture evaporating, together with the change of seasons (i.e. less sunshine) results in lower hydroxyl levels in the atmosphere at the higher latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere, in turn resulting in less methane being broken down in the atmosphere over the Arctic.

Gulf Stream

Malcolm Light writes in this and this earlier posts that the volume transport of the Gulf Stream has increased by three times since the 1940's, due to the rising atmospheric pressure difference set up between the polluted, greenhouse gas rich air above North America and the marine Atlantic Air.

The increasingly heated Gulf Stream with its associated high winds and energy rich weather systems then flows NE to Europe where it is increasingly pummeling Great Britain with catastrophic storms, as also described in this earlier post, which adds that faster winds means more water evaporation, and warmer air holds more water vapor, so this can result in huge rainstorms that can rapidly devastate the integrity of the ice. The image below further illustrates the danger of strong winds over the North Atlantic reaching the Arctic.

Branches of the Gulf Stream then enter the Arctic and disassociate the subsea Arctic methane hydrate seals on subsea and deep high - pressure mantle methane reservoirs below the Eurasian Basin - Laptev Sea transition. This is releasing increasing amounts of methane into the atmosphere where they contribute to anomalously high local temperatures, greater than 20°C above average.

From: The Biggest Story of 2013

Emissions from North America are - due to the Coriolis effect - moving over areas off the North American coast in the path of the Gulf Stream (see animation on the right).

The Gulf Stream reaches its maximum temperatures off the North American coast in July. It can take almost four months for this heat to travel along the Gulf Coast and reach the Arctic Ocean, i.e. water warmed up off Florida in early July may only reach waters beyond Svalbard by the end of October.

Waters close to Svalbard reached temperatures as high as 63.5°F (17.5°C) on September 1, 2014 (green circle). The image below shows sea surface temperatures only - at greater depths (say about 300 m), the Gulf Stream can push even warmer water through the Greenland Sea than temperatures at the sea surface.

Since the passage west of Svalbard is rather shallow, a lot of this very warm water comes to the surface at that spot, resulting in an anomaly of 11.9°C. The high sea surface temperatures west of Svalbard thus show that the Gulf Stream can carry very warm water (warmer than 17°C) at greater depths and is pushing this underneath the sea ice north of Svalbard.

from: Causes of high methane levels over Arctic Ocean

Through to March the following year, salty and warm water (i.e. warmer than water that is present in the Arctic Ocean) will continue to be carried by the Gulf Stream into the Arctic Ocean, while the sea ice will keep the water sealed off from the atmosphere, so little heat and moisture will be able to be transferred to the atmosphere.

Start of melting period

This situation continues until March, when the sea ice starts to retreat and more hydroxyl starts getting produced in the atmosphere. Increased sea ice melt and glaciers melt, the latter resulting in warmer water flowing into the Arctic Ocean from rivers, will cause salinity levels in the Arctic Ocean to fall, in turn causing methane levels to fall in the atmosphere over the Arctic Ocean. Furthermore, the water traveling along the Gulf Stream and arriving in the Arctic Ocean in March will be relatively cold.

References

- Chepurin, G.A., and J.A. Carton, 2012: Sub-arctic and Arctic sea surface temperature and its relation to ocean heat content 1982-2010, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans., 117, C06019, DOI: 10.1029/2011JC007770. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2011JC007770/abstract

- Combination image created by Sam Carana with Climate Reanalyzer, from: Temperature Rise, http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2014/10/ocean-temperature-rise.html

- Submarine pingoes: Indicators of shallow gas hydrates in a pockmark at Nyegga, Norwegian Sea, by Martin Hovland and Henrik Svensen (2006) http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025322705003968

- Sea surface temperature west of Svalbard,
created by Sam Carana with
http://earth.nullschool.net

Post by Sam Carana.